Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UK Independence Party) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 22 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on EU: Justice and Home Affairs.


EU: Justice and Home Affairs

My Lords, the Minister referred to the Written Statement in the other place by the Minister, Mr Lidington, on 20 January, which was repeated by the noble Lord, Lord Howell. I should like to press the Minister on what Mr Lidington, said in debate on 26 January, which comes somewhat later and is very precise. He said: "““The decision on whether to exercise the bloc opt-out is important and sensitive for the United Kingdom””." He agreed with Mr Jenkin on that point. He went on: "““Its implications for the whole range of complex, technical and often interrelated measures concerned will need to be carefully considered, and they ought to be carefully considered by Government and Parliament””." He then said—and this is the point that I want the Minister to clarify: "““I agree completely that Parliament should give its view on … a formal decision on whether we wish to opt in or out””.—[Official Report, Commons, 26/1/11; col. 399.]" That is not just a debate that follows any lifting of the scrutiny reserve—as your Lordships know I regard that as pretty well completely useless because it has been overridden hundreds of times in the past few years and Brussels never takes any notice of it anyway—or this commitment from the Government; as the Minister and other noble Lords have mentioned, we have been opting in to some of this stuff along the road. I understand that if we agree to an amendment of it, it becomes cast in European law. The question for the Minister is: what is to be the enduring value of Protocols 19 and 21? Upon what will both Houses of Parliament be able to vote when the time comes? I put this in an Oral Question to the Government six weeks or so ago. The noble Lord, Lord McNally, answering for the Government, said that the subject was really too delicate to discuss in public and that he would give it some thought and come back to us. Have the Government given it that thought and what is the answer? Where do this Government stand on this matter with their EU Bill? Do they envisage any of the JHA opt-ins being subject to a referendum of the British people? Where do we stand on a vote, not just a debate, in both Houses of Parliament, which was promised on 26 January? Where do we stand on the EU Bill, assuming that the Government have the sense to put back into it all the parts that were foolishly excluded by your Lordships' House?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c111GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Annual reports Immigration controls Jurisdiction EU law Human trafficking EU action EU justice and home affairs Police Prosecutions Parliamentary scrutiny Seasonal workers Schengen Agreement European Court of Justice EU immigration Belarus Multinational companies
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk